Is Capital One right to junk direct mail?

I was interested to see Capital One is pulling the plug on direct mail for acquisition, an unsurprising cost-cutting measure perhaps given the $1.4bn loss reported by the company in Q4 2008. Predictably there have been whoops of joy amongst marketing luvvies who view cold credit card direct mail with the same distaste they reserve for queue-jumping or cruelty to kittens. But these are often commentators who have never had responsibility for achieving hard results. By which I mean securing a precise and accountable number of sales per campaign over and above a control.

Contrary to some of you, I never thought Capital One produced junk. Their mailings were always about the product, focusing on key product benefits. They got to the point and didn't pretend to be about something else. As far as I know, they didn't willfully mail people who were bad credit risks or who had no propensity to respond.

Direct mail still has a role to play in acquisition. It can 'interrupt' in a way email, online advertising, a facebook presence, virals etc sometimes struggle to. Putting all your eggs into one search basket is a risk, too. And mail is individually targeted, unlike DRTV. It can drive customers online and make them pre-disposed before they reach a comparison site. It has space to explain more complex products, like financial ones. The role of direct mail will certainly have to change if it is to become a prompter and will need to integrate with these other media. But to slightly older, more affluent consumers - the ones with the money - it probably has a job to do.

Unlike Kingston Smith I'd back independent agencies to flourish

Marketing Direct's ever watchful Noelle McElhatton reports that "profits at independent agencies fell 37% in 2007" according to the latest Kingston Smith report. On the face of it, this is 'bad news'. Despite notable exceptions - Kitcatt Nohr and Partners reported a 20% increase in profits - the inference is that we independents are not managing our businesses well.

But in credit crunch Britain, would you rather be working for - or with - an independent agency that can react flexibly to a recession or a group subsidiary where a diktat is issued from New York to cut 10% from all staff costs, irrespective of ability or local need? Would you feel more confident working with a company that is obliged to retain its supertanker-slow global structures, processes and procedures despite the fact the recession demands a nimbler, more cost-effective, response?

Maybe some of the independent agencies are taking a bit of a hit on profit as client belts are tightened. Why? Because we can. We are not obliged to deliver a specific figure to a group board. We can take the decision to invest - to maintain service levels and retain key staff, so we are well placed to benefit when the climate improves. Nor are we obliged to be limited or rigid in the way we charge for work.

We will soon see the knock-on effects of big group agencies aggressively cutting costs, if we are not already. Clients will despair of work being turned around slowly, at pre-recession prices, delivered with poor service and errors. Waves of redundancies have an effect on morale and service levels that last far longer than short term cost-cutting. Suddenly, that 10% saving is looking very expensive.

Has the curse of awards struck Thomson and WDMP?

I see that Thomson (holidays) is up for pitch again. We pitched for the account last time (October 2006) and didn't get it. A shame, but these things happen. WDMP deservedly did win and went on to produce a fabulous campaign that won the prestigious IDM Business Performance Diamond Award 2008. Now, the IDM awards are not one of the narcissistic, creative love-ins, that acknowledge stuff that simply looks pretty or has been produced by that year's most trendy agency. The submissions are thorough, the judges are of the highest calibre and the focus is very much on campaigns that have demonstrably improved a client's business.

For me, the news that the account could change hands again follows the age old rule about winning awards  and losing clients. TVL and Proximity is another recent example. HTW won loads of awards for M&G but still didn't hang on to it. I've said for years that If you want to forecast an account move, just look at who's won an award recently.

Why does this happen? Is it complacency after winning gold? Are the results not actually that good - merely 'sexed up' to impress a relatively inexperienced judging panel? Has the agency put too much focus one pretty but ineffective job? I'm convinced winning awards and losing clients are related. Anybody else know why?

Clucking hell, what's Iggy Pop doing in a Swiftcover ad?

Swiftcover were the ones with the clucking chickens. Clearly no-one liked them so they've been killed off and replaced with anothy scrawny animal, Iggy Pop. The ad now has 'attitude' and with its fast-paced editing, oblique shots and pounding soundtrack more closely resembles something you'd catch on MTV2. This is a massive leap in tone and style. It's like Alan Bennett switching to txt spk.

To which demographic does Iggy Pop appeal? Everyone or no-one bar a few brain-fried old rockers? Is Iggy Pop someone you'd want to buy insurance from? And lively though the ad undoubtedly is, it took a few viewings before I realised it was for car insurance (it is for car insurance, isn't it?). I feel it's trying too hard to be 'alternative'. I'm not sure general insurance products can ever be angry, let alone hip. And while Swiftcover rightly wants to achieve stand out, insurance advertising still has to deliver on hygiene factors such as cost saving, benefits and ease.

I never liked the chickens and this is a brave attempt to be different, for which it must be applauded. But it's just too manic for this market and I predict heroic failure. Sorry. Next time, why not ask that nice James Blunt? He drives tanks, you know.

Will you comparethemarket.com or the meerkat?

It may just work. Brands in this space benefit from a memorable visual icon - Churchill's dog, Direct Line's phone, esure's mouse etc... And animals work brilliantly to the UK public. More Than have never been the same since Lucky the dog died.

Comparethemarket.com's new campaign featuring the Meerkat is the latest attempt to posit a brand icon in the public's mind. Let's wish it well. There is humour to it and a wryly amusing comparethemeerkat.com website, too.

There just might be too much Meerkat and too little car insurance in the first wave of ads, so don't be surprised if the little chap is toned down a bit in the future. But good luck!

What on earth are Renault doing?

I really like the Renault Megane but the current TV ad irritates me massively. I have to turn it off. The conceit is that there are sorts of things you promise you'd never do in life  "You'd never get a mobile...or a computer....you'd never love anyone else....or have kids etc etc". Well, apparently there was a time when I swore I'd never get a Renault. Like many, I don't remember ever doing that but apparently now is the time I should re-assess the brand.

This ad is wrong on so many levels it's hard to know where to start. Renault is not a 'Marmite brand'. Consumers don't love it or hate it. Most are utterly ambivalent. "I've gone for a Renault this time.." "Oh, have you?" would be the natural, slightly bored response. Most people, with the possible exception of a Jeremy Clarkson, have never vowed to shun Renault for all time. They're not that bothered either way. And to equate it with vowing never to have children is simply incredible. It's just in research, when forced to answer a question they've never asked themselves, some will have said "No, I've never really thought of getting a Renault"...but you can hardly equate that with passionate dislike.

But even if you believe a significant percentage of consumers have a passionate loathing for dear old Renault, is this really the right strategy for today? Surely the challenge in a recession is to persuade people who actually quite like Renaults to go and get a new one now, rather than delay their purchase by 2 years? Which is what car buyers are currently doing. This is NOT the time to try and convert refuseniks. Especially ones that don't really exist.

And the soundtrack is dreadful.